Form 1 NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD Award No. 29349
THIRD DIVISION Docket No. SG-29108
92-3-90-3-11
The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in
addition Referee Irwin M. Lieberman when award was rendered.
;Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen
PARTIES :7 DISPUTE:
Consolidated Rail Corporation
STATEMENT OF CLAIM: Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the Brother-ood of Railro
:orporation (CONRAIL):
~1aim on benalf of J. R. Peterson, for payment of 6 hours pay at his
punitive rate of pay, account o: Carrier violated the current Signalmen's
Agreement, as amended, particularly, APPENDIX 'P', when on October 2, 1988, it
failed to call him
'it
signal trouble on his assigned territory at RailHighway Crossings M? 165.4 and ':70.65." Carrier
FINDINGS:
The Third Civision of the Adjustment Board upon the whole record
and all the evidence, finds that:
The carrier or carriers and the employe or employes involved in this
dispute are respect-:ely carrier and employes within the meaning of the
Railway Labor Act as approved -une 21, 1934.
This DivisLon of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the
dispute involved herein.
Parties to said dispute waived right of appearance at hearing thereon.
The Organization claims that Carrier violated the provisions of
Paragraphs 6 and 9 of Appendix P (dated November 16, 1978) which provides:
"6. The Signal Maintainer assigned to that
position in the section involved will, if he has
added his name in accordance with Item 5 above, be
listed First on the calling list for his section.
If more than one Signal Maintainer have the same
responsibilities and territory, they will be listed
in class seniority order."
"9. A reasonable effort will be made to comply
with the procedure outlined above but this shall not
be permitted to delay getting a qualified employee to
report promptly at the point necessary to cope with
the situation."
Form 1 Award No. 29349
Page 2 Docket No. SG-29108
92-3-90-3-11
The record indicates that while Claimant was on a normal rest day a
problem occurred on =wo crossing gates in his regular territory about five
miles apart. Both problems involved malfunctioning crossing gates, characterized by Carrier as emerg
Claimant.
The Organization insists that Carrier was obligated to call Claimant,
the proper Signal "la:ntainer for the territory, rather than the Signal Inspector. Further :c is arg
least as soon as the Signal Inspector.
Carrier araies that there was an emergency and it did the prudent
thing under the circimstances. Further Carrier argues that the provisions of
Paragraph 9 are suspended in the event of emergency situations such as this.
Carrier also notes =zat even if a violation occurred, which it denies, punitive pay is not appropria
The Board rotes that Third Division Award 27606 involving the same
parties is almost identical to the instant matter. In that Award we said,
inter alia, that t''^e provisions of paragraph 6 are not automatically suspended
when prompt attent_on is required to remedy a problem. Here, as in the case
cited supra, a reasonable effort must be made to comply with the calling procedure. No such attempt
failed to conform to the proper procedure. The Claim must be sustained.
Further, however, ti.e proper reedy for violation such as this is straight
time rather than the punitive rate (see Third Division Award 28131).
A W A R D
Claim sustained in accordance with the Findings.
NATIONAL RAILROAD ADJUSTMENT BOARD
By Order of Third Division
Attest:
.4010
an~3 -Executive Secretary
7
Dated at Chicago, :111nois, this 25th day of August 1992.